Misterjones, I wanted to go back to this thread so your information doesn’t get lost in the shuffle of such a long thread. It’s very concise and hits the mark. The big issue to me in dealing with music from this era is how it’s mastered. We all know that in the 60’s and 70’s there was the misdirected thought to master this era in fake stereo. It’s just been in the Mosaic era that a label dedicated itself to preserving the music as it was laid down on wax. So, now, with more than 5 decades of shoddy releases it’s still a chore to hunt down good sounding issues of this material. And again, misterjones, you’ve done a wonderful job at keeping things as clear as they can be. Im just starting out with Goodman, so this clarity means everything to me. I’m going to delve into the 3 cd rca set of small group recordings this weekend. Take care you all and keep it going! Beave
Thanks for the kind words. I think at some point we all should make a list of essentials (including some I did not mention, such as the Charlie Christian collection, Goodman's recordings with Peggy Lee, the Rhythm Makers session, the pre-swing stuff, and Goodman's 1960s-1980s work (albeit weaker as a whole, but still including some great releases). We'd have to take it in chunks (e.g., start with the best RCA Victor small groups set).
Questions for those who have both the small groups set noted above and the CD or LP version of the complete RCA Victor recordings: Does the small group set have better sound for those recordings? Where, if anywhere else, do you get the best sound for these recordings? I’ll have to relisten to my various sets, including the Jazz Tribune LPs.
I struggle to hear a consistent difference in order to state with certainty that one sounds better than the other. I hear some differences between tracks on the "Complete RCA Victor Small Groups" box and the Japanese CD, but they just sound like differences in the masters themselves, not significant EQ or SQ differences. It was so minimal, in fact, that I've stopped comparing the RCA Complete Small Groups to the others. I'm working on comparisons between the original 78s, the 16lp box, and the Japanese CD set. I've also found the difference so minimal between the 16lp set and 8x2s that I've dropped the 8x2s from comparison as well. There is a track here or there that I think sounds slightly better but it was so minimal as not to be worth the effort. I'm sure there must be some 25 year old with perfect hearing somewhere who can tell the difference, but I can't. Edit: I have the 1965 "BG: The Small Groups" LP (LPV-521) and will go back and hear if those have significant SQ/EQ differences. It is possible with less wear on the masters that they sound better. There was none of the fake stereo effect added and I noted no mention of "orthophonic" enhanced sound, which we've had a previous discussion about.
After a not-so-scientific test, I find the Complete RCA Victor Small Groups box to have a bit more clarity than my Jazz Tribune LPs but at the expense of more harshness in the former. However, I had to rely on Spotify for the former. The Japanese box might have the best of both worlds. I certainly don’t detect any harshness on that set. Do you hear any of this harshness? I don’t want to rely entirely on a streaming service for that conclusion, especially since it sounded a OK yesterday when using headphones.
I just quickly compared "Exactly Like You" (chosen randomly) across additional sets than what I'm considering in my longer review: 1965 LPV-521: Muted sound. High end was suppressed. Sounds warm and muddy. 1996 RCA Complete Small Groups: High end there, hissy but not scratchy. Can barely hear it, but the spinning of the master is audible. 1987 RCA The RCA Years Box (Japan): Audibly less high end than the 1996 set but a very minor difference, hiss removed. Same with spinning of the master. 1986 RCA Victor Years 16lp box: Indistinguishable from the Japan boxed set. 1936 Victor Scroll in excellent condition: strongest mids of any version. High end clear w/o hiss. Pre-empting my conclusion from my longer review: if you're looking to as closely approximate the sound of the original 78s, go with the Japanese set. If you like the high end, the 1996 set is the best (same for other tracks on the Birth of Swing), but you really have to listen to hear the extra high end on many tracks. If you hate high end noise, go with almost any version on a 1950s or 60s RCA Victor LP, including the five disc set (LPT-6703). Overall best version: 16LP set or Japanese CD set.
I’ll have to give my 78s - After You’ve Gone b/w Body & Soul and Sweet Sue Just You b/w My Melancholy Baby - a spin, but I think I already know the outcome.
I was making a fundamental error when playing 78s that the other BG thread alerted me to. I never recognized the need to split one channel coming out of my 78 turntable to both left and right inputs in my receiver. I just let left and right out of the turntable hooked to the left and right input in the receiver and didn't really think much about it. I've understood the concept of stereo forever but it just didn't click that I was hearing a channel full of additional noise until someone pointed out that you either need mono cartridge (expensive) or to split either the left or right channel (cheap) when playing 78s. After having done that, 78s are almost my preferred media for Goodman's music. I say almost because they are so hard to find in excellent condition and can be, therefore, very surface noisy. The pristine ones I have are unreal sounding. (Its also why I now have a turntable set up just for 78s [needle and line splitter] and one for 33s/45s).
But a 78 cart/stylus obviates the need to do that, correct? Also, is it appropriate to play a 78 with a stereo stylus? My 78 styli are 2.5 and 3.0 mil spherical, whereas my “fattest” stereo stylus is .7 mil. My mono is .6 mil.
Yes on the first account. When I consulted the internet, all sources point to the need for a 3.0 mil stylus for 78s. I'm not sure there is such a thing as a stereo vs. mono stylus itself (maybe there is, I'm not a sound expert). Its the grooves that produce the mono vs. stereo sound and the size of the stylus relates to the size of the groove (larger on 78s which is why they need the 3.0 mil stylus). The cartridge is what converts the vibrations from the groove and needle into the electronic signal and then sends it up the tone arm via the wires and on and out.
I recommend the Complete RCA Small Group’s set because I believe there are alternate takes on it not found on the Japanese set and Loren Schoenberg’s notes, which are always invaluable. Loren told me they worked hard on the sound for the complete small group set to avoid the extreme harshness of the Birth of Swing set (that set is really only valuable for Loren’s notes). Other than that I think the Japanese set is the best. As a Goodman collecting nut, I have and will keep both, along with lesser versions.
That's a very good point. I was only focused on sound quality. There are alternate takes on the RCA Complete Small Groups set not found elsewhere.
Wow here’s a GORGEOUS MINT CONDITION Goodman 78: BENNY GOODMAN: King Porter US RCA VICTOR 44-0006 Jukebox Jazz 78 E- HEAR | eBay $20! Beave
I'll be clear in my review that the whole point of the thread when it started (many moons ag0) was what to buy to start a collection. There is a difference between recommending Goodman to someone who wants to minimize overlap and get a good representation of his work, someone who wants the best sound quality, and someone who is a completeist and wants as much of his recorded work as possible. Those three positions are rarely compatible. For instance, I would never recommend 78s to the casual collector - e.g. someone who just wants a good smattering of Goodman. But for a completeist or someone who wants original SQ, they are essential. A year or so ago, I never would have dreamed I would have written that, but my experience with the original Victors have changed my mind about 78s. (There is also the angle - how much can I get as cheaply as possible, but sadly we can't have it all!). As a follow up, I have everything I own (LPs, CDs, 78s) catalogued and I may just go through everything I have and annotate it for benefit of anyone seriously looking for Goodman's stuff. Others could add to the spreadsheet anything I don't have (which is probably a non-trivial amount of stuff - I'm not a complete completeist, yet!).
Gentle warning: as cute as that issue is (coin-operator's special), that's a dubbed master. RCA did a series of those; I have Miller's Moonlight Serenade. RCA's mid-'40s dubs were... variable.... Look for a clean Victor 25090, preferably scroll, to get a master-press copy. (Hint: check the inner eccentric trip groove, the one that would activate your turntable to return its arm at the end of the record. For this period, master pressings had a double groove. By the '40s, when dubbing those things, RCA used a single inner eccentric.)
Dave, are the Circle re-issues in the late 30s - early 40s of comparable quality to the original Scrolls? I have 25090 both on scroll and the circle reissue with Sometimes on the B side (not the coin op shown below) but struggle to hear any audible difference. Maybe my ears are just bad? Many of my Scrolls are not pristine, which also leads to my aural confusion. I can't pin down exactly when Victor reissued the Goodman Scrolls on the Circle labels (on Victor, not RCA Victor). Sources are variable - some say they reissued in 38 others 43. Any info would be much appreciated. I ordered Sherman's "The Paper Dog" but it is sadly uninformative on such issues.
Lol! That post was for you guys, I'm not going to get into 78's! But I did buy the 16 l.p. Set from a 3rd party bookstore on Amazon for $70 total. Tax & shipping. Near mint condition on the L.P.s. So if I desire I can make my own cd's off the vinyl. Have both worlds! Beave
Ohhhh, but be very, very careful. It only takes one. Only one! They slowly suck you into their clutches and then, before you know it, a 33 1/3 looks oddly slow and sounds muddy. Then another comes in the mail, then another. (LOL)
It depends on whether the original metal parts were still being used. Again, look at the eccentric trip: if it's a double, you're probably getting the master pressing. A good example is the Gene Krupa session you and I discussed briefly offline. The two "hot" tunes were on Victor originally, reissued later on Bluebird. The Bluebird issue is still master pressed, can sound as good. Same applies to the scroll / circle label issues. It was, I think, after WW2 started that Victor started dubbing those things - I've seen and heard a reissue pressing of "Sing, Sing, Sing" (12-inch version) where side 2 was dubbed, and it sounds pretty tragic. It was dubbed likely because the original master cut went way, way toward the center of the disc; some buyers might have had mechanical problems playing it all the way to the end. Thus, beware my office... and the basement of a good local friend!
Probably if the selections were kept in the catalog they simply replaced scroll with circle as the old stock sold out post-mid 1937.
This is very helpful. I just compared my 1937 version of Sing to the 1947 version and yep, the 1947 12” shellac on the RCA Victor label is a single groove. I’ll listen with headphones in the morning to side B and see if it suffers from a poor dub.
